Re: Motion P1788/M0032.01:MidpointMeaning -- discussion period begins
On 2012-03-09 13:01:46 -0800, Dan Zuras Intervals wrote:
> It DOES violate the notion of semi-infinite sets that
> live at level 1. At least, those that live within IR.
> And if you would like me to modify the proposal to
> include only bounded non-empty intervals within IR at
> level 1, I would accept that as friendly. They can
> be reintroduced at level 2 in much the same way as
> midpoint(Entire) was done.
If you want to define the midpoint of semi-unbounded intervals
as being infinite at Level 1, then this contradicts the Level 2
requirement on the fact that the midpoint must be a finite
number. So, I think the only good specification is to let such
a midpoint undefined at Level 1.
--
Vincent Lefèvre <vincent@xxxxxxxxxx> - Web: <http://www.vinc17.net/>
100% accessible validated (X)HTML - Blog: <http://www.vinc17.net/blog/>
Work: CR INRIA - computer arithmetic / AriC project (LIP, ENS-Lyon)